HHS Ruling on Contraceptive Coverage

Two weeks ago, President Obama signed off on Health and Human Services ruling that could cost him the election.  In a move that has Catholics outraged across America, President Obama consented to a mandate that states under the new healthcare system, Catholic institutions will be required to provide and pay for abortificients, contraception, and sterilization.  

We’re all wondering to ourselves why the President would agree to a decision that blatantly violates Church teaching, and arguably the First Amendment.  Reelection is the first priority in his mind, but his actions indicate otherwise.  In 2008, President Obama won the Catholic vote 54% to 45%.  More significantly, there are 77.7 million Catholics in the United States, a number that comprises 27% of the electorate.  

The Affordable Care Act, popularized as Obamacare, would not exist without Catholic Health Association President Sister Carol Keehan.  She endured criticisms from hundreds of bishops for supporting the legislation when it was passed in 2010.  She maintained, correctly at the time, that the bill would not fund abortions or contraceptions of any kind because this is what the President of the United States told her.  It turns out she was wrong.

There are 620 Catholic hospitals across the country, an amount that accounts for 12.4% of America’s 5,010 hospitals.  They provide 15% of hospital beds in the country, and handle 15.7% of total patient visits.  There are 6,980 Catholic elementary and secondary schools in America.  Catholic social services serve the poor and those in needs, strengthen individuals and families, and are a strong advocate for social justice in communities.  Without question, Catholic institutions matter to the health, education, and well-being of Americans.

So why would the Department of Health and Human Services and President Obama force 27% of the electorate to go against their beliefs?  Is it secularist arrogance or mere political ineptness?  Churches are exempt from this ruling, but church-run schools, hospitals, and social service agencies are not.

Again, Mr. Obama should not expect to win the Catholic vote in November after this decision.  New York Cardinal-elect Timothy Dolan and Cardinal Daniel DiNardo have spearheaded an effort to oppose the ruling at Catholic Churches across the country.  The timing of the ruling makes you wonder as well--the Obama administration announced its decision just three days before the annual March for Life in Washington D.C.  

How To Become a Catholic

Recently, I attended an annual conference focused on establishing fellowship among Christian men.  Dubbed Men of Valor, the event features speakers that offer insights on Christian sexuality and purity.  Although Men of Valor is organized by a Protestant group, the director Phillip Cosby invites Catholic  speakers to participate.  The collaboration between denominations to address the pervasive issue of sexual addiction is encouraging and reassuring.  I have been informed that some individuals have converted to Catholicism after hearing some of the breakout talks.  I’m not sure if this claim is true, but an intriguing issue arises from this thought.

So how does one convert to Catholicism?  Many people are Catholic because they were baptized as infants.  As they grow up, these individuals either confirm their initiation into Catholicism through the sacraments and regular attendance of mass or elect to follow other faiths or no faiths at all.  However, if a person outside the Church wants to join the Catholic faith, there is a process of preparation.  Adults and children older than the age of seven must undergo training in the Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults (RCIA).  Furthermore, the process of becoming a Catholic is different for non-Christians and Christians.

Non-Christians

First, an unbaptized person must learn about the Catholic faith.  This step is facilitated by the entrance into the order of catechumens, where the unbaptized  are provided with a thorough background of Christian and Catholic teaching.  A catechumen is the term given to those who have not yet been initiated as Christians.  The purpose of this time is to give the catechumens the opportunity to strengthen their faith and reflect on their desire to become Catholic.  The catechumens generally stay in this phase for less than a year.

Second, the catechumen takes the rite of election thereby expressing a sincere desire and intention to receive the Sacraments by writing his or her name in a book.  Normally, the Rite of Election happens on the first Sunday of Lent, the 40 day period of fasting and preparation for Easter.

Third, after the right of election, the candidates experience a time of deep reflection through participation in several rituals known as scrutinies.  These scrutinies are designed to bring out the best and worst qualities of the catechumen.  During this period of intense meditation and prayer, the candidates are given the Apostles’ Creed and the Lord’s Prayer, which they recite on the evening of initiation.

Fourth, the initiation itself happens on the Easter Vigil the night before Easter Sunday.  At this special mass, the catechumens receive three sacraments- baptism, confirmation, and the Eucharist.  On this unique evening, the catechumens are accepted into the Catholic Church.

Lastly, the new Catholics go through mystagogy, a time in which faith is strengthened and an immersion into the Catholic community takes place.  For the first year as Catholics, the new initiates are known as neophytes, or “New Christians”.   

Christians

If a person is already a Christian and wishes to convert to Catholicism, there is a separate process of conversion.  

For non-practicing Christians, the instruction received can be similar to a catechumen’s experience.  However, these people are not catechumens because they have already been raised as Christians.  It follows that they should not participate in the rites and rituals mentioned above.  Practicing Christians only need to receive instruction of the Catholic tradition before converting.  Therefore, these people do not need to undergo the entire RCIA program.  It is up to the Church to decide who has lived a Christian life prior to converting to Catholicism. 

Interestingly enough, the timing of their reception into the Church is different.  Rather than being initiated on the Easter Vigil, Christians are welcomed as Catholics on any Sunday celebration of the Eucharist.   

Of course, the conversion to Catholicism is a personal decision that should be made only after long periods of reflection and study into the traditions of the Catholic tradition.  The Catholic Church spans milleniums, and thus,is the oldest Christian church, tracing its roots to Jesus of Nazareth.  Approximately 1 billion people identify themselves as Catholics, so prior to joining this global community, a prospective convert should truly believe in the Church’s teachings.     

Homilies of Cardinal DiNardo and Archbishop Dolan

Earlier this week, I returned from the March for Life in Washington D.C. where, in addition to the March itself, I had the opportunity to listen to Cardinal DiNardo deliver an awe-inspiring homily to over 20,000 Catholic pilgrims in the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception.  His words resonated with me primarily because he stood strong against the blatant anti-life efforts of Health and Human Services and the Obama Administration.  Last week, the President Obama restated that many religious institutions would be required to fund contraception including abortifacient birth control pills as part of their health insurance coverage.  

“We are nearing the 40th anniversary of Roe versus Wade,” Cardinal DiNardo preached.  “53 million children have lost their lives since then; millions of men and women have lives that will never be the same because of their tragic choices.  Our embrace of life must be clear...Disturbing news came to us Friday from HHS and the Obama Administration: it fundamentally repeated the mandate that sterilization and contraception must be included in virtually all health plans.  Never before in our US history has the federal government forces citizens to directly purchase what violates our beliefs.”

Archbishop and Cardinal-elect Timothy Dolan added another point that hits all pro-lifers hard: 

“From a human point of view, we may be tempted to surrender, when our government places conception, pregnancy, and birth under the ‘Center for Disease Control,’ when chemically blocking conception or aborting the baby in the womb is considered a ‘right’ to be subsidized by others who abhor it.”

In Memoriam: John P. Foley and Christopher Hitchens

Hitchens

Cardinal Foley

Two individuals on the opposite ends of the religious spectrum died in the past week.  Cardinal John Patrick Foley and Christopher Hitchens are no longer with us as we enter the winter season.  

Cardinal Foley, best known for his role as the Vatican’s communications director for almost a quarter century, died from leukemia in Darby, Pennsylvania.  His voice was heard by millions throughout the world as he narrated in English the pope’s midnight Christmas Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica.  Foley was always quick to defend the Catholic Church.  He once referred to AIDS as a “natural sanction against certain types of activities” and opposed allowing women to become Roman Catholic priests.  However, Cardinal Foley consistently spoke out against the sexual abuse scandals by rogue individuals within the Church.

Born in Darby in 1935, he started writing radio plays about the lives of saints in seventh grade.  At the age of 14, he was the broadcaster for a Sunday morning radio show.  While at St. Joseph’s Preparatory School in Philadelphia, he said he heard “God’s little whisper” to enter the priesthood.  In 1957, he graduated summa cum laude from St. Joseph’s College and entered St. Charles Borromeo Seminary.  In 1962, he was ordained and assigned to a suburban parish.   

Under the advice of Cardinal John Krol of Philadelphia, Foley enrolled at Columbia Journalism School where he was the oldest student in his class.  In 1966, he earned a Master’s degree and was promptly sent to Rome for advanced studies.  While in Rome, he earned a doctorate from the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas.  In 1979, he was appointed as the media liaison for Pope John Paul II’s first trip to the United States.  In 1984, he was named an archbishop and given the responsibilities of Vatican spokesman.  After retiring this year, Cardinal Foley returned to the Philadelphia area.

Foley loved to tell a story that illustrated his priestly and journalistic identities.  On a trip to Egypt in 1975, Cardinal Krol asked him whether he should take a camel ride.  Father Foley, ever the cautious man, said no, but Cardinal Krol ignored the advice and hopped on a camel.  As Cardinal Krol struggled to stay on the camel, Father Foley snapped a picture.  When asked why he had taken the picture after advising against the ride, Foley responded, “As your priest, I gave you my best advice.  As a journalist, I took your picture.”  

In addition to being an outspoken critic of religion, Chistopher Hitchens was a self-proclaimed socialist with Trotskyite roots.  Early in his writing career, he targeted Henry Kissinger and was staunch in his support for the Palestinian cause.  His interviews and writings often took the form of strong verbal or written attacks rather than objective analysis.  He even went so far as to call Mother Teresa a “thieving fanatical Albanian dwarf.”

As a young man, Hitchens traveled widely to Poland, Portugal, Czechoslovakia, and Argentina at crucial moments in their anti-totalitarian struggles.  After the terrorist attacks on 9/11/2001, Hitchens announced he was no longer on the political left, and “swore an oath to remain coldly furious” until “fascism with an Islamic face” was “brought to a most strict and merciless account.”  He surprised many when he visited George W. Bush at the White House and befriended Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz.  Shortly after, he resigned from his journalist position at the Nation, one of America’s leading leftwing publications.  

Hitchen’s personal life was wrought with dualism and course behavior.  He was nearly expelled from boarding school for homosexuality and later boasted that at Oxford he slept with two future male members of the Margaret Thatcher cabinet.  Eventually, he became a dedicated heterosexual because he said his looks deteriorated to the point where no man was interested in him.  His love of alcohol and tobacco never wavered--he smoked heavily and drank enough “to kill or stun the average mule.”  Even when diagnosed with terminal cancer, he drank heavy amounts of whisky.  Years after his mother passed away, he learned through his brother that she came from a family of east European Jews.  Although he was only 1/32rd Jewish, Hitchens declared himself a Jew according to the custom of matrilineal descent.       

His most successful book is titled “God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything”, and it is a mockery of religion that put him alongside Richard Dawkins as an enemy of believers.  Hitchens let everyone around him know there would be no deathbed conversion to religion.  When believers prayed for him, he declared himself as flattered, but was obstinate in his atheism.    

Interview: Jerry Viviano

In addition to being a loving father and husband, Jerry Viviano works at Sysco Foodservices, and has been a first-class salesman for 38 years.  A native of St. Louis, Missouri, Jerry attended Missouri University and graduated with a degree in marketing.  Besides providing his services to Kansas City businesses, Jerry is the founder and chairman of the Viviano Variety Show, an annual benefit show that has raised over $1 million for charities and schools.  Recently, Jerry answered some questions for Joe’s Musings.    

A significant number of our readers are college students.  What made you decide to major in marketing?  At what point did you know you wanted to pursue a career as a salesman?
I have always been fascinated by the way products are invented, grown, manufactured, and promoted.  Born and raised in a family of fresh produce entrepreneurs, I saw first hand how salesmanship is a key component in marketing goods and services.  Long before college, I felt selling would be my profession.

Along those lines, how does a person prepare for a career in sales? How important is landing an internship while in college?
In today’s business environment, a selling career mandates computer and technical skills.  Product and business knowledge is readily available via many sources.  A well-rounded college business education provides the finesse needed to communicate in a selling world.  Getting involved in a business fraternity, going to seminars and spending time with businesses that visit college campuses are extremely important.  Don’t ever underestimate the value of people skills.  Successful sales people always are genuinely interested in helping clients succeed.  A great resource is Dale Carnegie’s book How To Win Friends and Influence People.  The Carnegie sales and human development courses are also excellent.  Internships are wonderful.  If you do land one, ask to ride with the company’s most successful sales people.  You can learn a lot from them.

The US economy has struggled mightily in recent years.  What changes have you noticed in the buying patterns of customers?  How have you adapted your sales strategies in a weaker economy?
Customers are scrutinizing prices closer today than ever before.  Unfortunately, cheaper prices for cheaper products do not translate into a more successful business for the customer.  As an institutional food sales representative, my strategy has been “What can I do to bring more diners into this restaurant?”  What new and different ideas can attract new customers to this restaurant?”  This can be done without sacrificing quality in products.

What is the best part of your job?  The worst part?
The best part of my job is sitting face to face with men and women who are making purchasing decisions.  My job enables me to help the customer find ways to run the business more efficiently.  The worst part of this job is filling out reports.  Much of this is unnecessary.  I would rather spend time in front of the customer.

How would you describe the work/family/life balance?
I start each day with a quiet prayer.  Every gift that I have been blessed with is just that- a gift from God.  This is the focal point in my life.  If I have a relationship with an all loving and merciful God, the work/family/life automatically falls into balance.  Life is all about priorities.  Relatively speaking, we are only on this earth for a very brief time.  As a Christian, I believe our Lord has prepared a beautiful place for us for all of eternity- and that is a long, long time.  All of that is waiting for us.  So my balance in life starts, and end, with a relationship with God.

What advice would you give to young people looking to pursue a career in sales?
If there is any advice I would give to young people who are pursuing a professional career in sales, it would be “Get Out of Yourself”.  If all you are concerned about is how much money you are going to earn selling, then this profession isn’t for you.  If you focus on how successful you can make customers and others, then dollars will be flowing into your backyard.

Do you agree with the saying, “You don’t close a sale.  You open a relationship if you want to build a long-term, successful enterprise”?
I do agree with the saying, “You don’t close a sale.”  Saying that you close a sale sounds like you have won a victory over someone.  Yes, you open a relationship than build and nurture that relationship in a trustworthy fashion.

What’s a life lesson you learned the hard way?
A life lesson I learned the hard way is about my attitude on investing the moeny I have earned.  I made some good and bad investments.  But if I were to do it all over again, I would do my research, put my resources in a safe portfolio early in life, and not worry or fret about it.  I wasted too much time on this.  I could have spent that time with family, friends, or building God’s kingdom.

4 Common Misconceptions About The Roman Catholic Church

While the Roman Catholic Church is the oldest and largest within Christianity, and it also might be the least understood Church of any religion.  Led by the Pope, the Roman Catholic Church reports more than a billion members.  Perhaps the most distinctive doctrine of Catholicism is transubstantiation, which teaches the bread and wine are transformed into the body and blood of Jesus Christ.  However, there are other teachings of the Church that people seem to misunderstand...

Misconception: Catholics worship Mary, and therefore, commit idoltry.
The Catholic Church identifies three types of worship- latria, hyperdulia, and dulia.  Latria, the highest form of worship, can only be given to God, and if it is offered to anyone or anything else, it is considered to be a sin.  Hyperdulia is considered a different degree of reverence, and therefore, it can be given to the Blessed Virgin Mary.  In English, hyperdulia roughly translates into veneration.  Dulia is a special type of veneration given to saints and angels.  

Misconception: The Pope is infallible (incapable of making mistakes).
In fact, the Pope is only infallible under very specific circumstances. 
-The Pope must be making a decree on matters on faith or morals
-The declaration must be binding on the whole Church
-The Pope must be speaking with the full authority of Papacy, and not in a personal capacity.

Here’s an example from Pope Saint Pius V in the 16th Century at the Council of Trent:

“If anyone denies that in the sacrament of the most Holy Eucharist are contained truly, really and substantially the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ, but says He is in it only as a sign, or figure, or force, let him be anathema.”

“Let him be anathema” is a standard phrase that generally appears at the end of an infallible teaching.  It means, “Let him be cursed.”  A more recent example is when Pope John Paul II declared that women can not become priests.

Misconception: The Catholic Church is anti-science, anti-reason, and rejects evolution.

On the contrary, the Catholic Church has contributed a great deal to science and education.  Belgian priest Monsignor Georges Lemaitre was the first to propose the Big Bang Theory.  Unlike many of the Protestant and evangelical denominations of Christianity, the Catholic Church does not outright reject the theory of evolution.  In 2004, a Theological Commission supervised by Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) issued the following statement--

“According to the widely accepted scientific account, the universe erupted 15 billion years ago in an explosion called the Big Bang and has been expanding and cooling ever since...Converging evidence from many studies in the physical and biological sciences furnishes mounting support for some theory of evolution to account for the development and diversification of life on earth, while controversy continues over the pace and mechanisms of evolution.”

Misconception: No Catholic priest can get married

While it is usually true that an ordained priest in the Roman Catholic Church can not be married, the Eastern Catholic Church does allow priests to marry, but a married priest cannot become a Bishop in the ladder case.  Not to be confused with the Orthodox Church, the Eastern Catholic Church still recognizes the Pope as the leader of the Church.  There are plenty of differences between the Roman Catholics and Eastern Catholics, but they believe nearly the same teachings.

Also, priests who convert from other religions are sometimes allowed to remain married.  The father of a high school friend of mine went through this process, and is now a married Roman Catholic priest.  

Guest Post: Don't Take Away Someone Else's Rights!

Today's post was written by Patrick Komlofske. Pat is proud to be a devout Catholic, and the most selfless person I know. He is forever giving his time and knowledge to put a smile on other's faces.  You can learn about his recording business, JMJ Communications, here.

Earlier this week I read a Facebook post stating the following:

Don't like gay marriages?  Don't get one..

Don't like cigarettes ?  Don't smoke them..

Don't like abortions?  Don't get one..

Don't like sex?  Don't have it..

Don't like drugs?  Don't do them..

Don't like porn?  Don't watch it..

Don't like alcohol?  Don't drink it..

Don't like guns?  Don't buy one..

Don't…like your rights taken away??? Don't take away someone else's.

{re-post if you agree}

I've held back a reply because I wanted to think about it.  At first, I wanted to comment: Don't like your parents?  Don't listen to them..  Don't like authority?  Don't respect it.  I thought that I might forget about it, but for several days I kept thinking about how disturbing some of this is.  Then I thought,  "Why am I so closed minded?"

I am an individual that truly loves our Lord.  As the southern bible belt would say; "I accept Jesus as my personal Lord and Savior".  For the last 20 years I have gained much education from studying beliefs of other denominations and that of my own Roman Catholic faith.  Since 1995, I have owned a recording business where I go to conferences, record their talks, then mass produce them on the spot for others to share.  While I am more informed than many, I am still no expert.  Each event I learn some very profound lessons, and meet many other people who love the Lord as much as I do.  So from that point of view, I thought the words above are words slamming the same morals that most religions try to instill in others.

After some prayer about this, and some objective thought, I am more at ease about it.  I don't see it as a slam on religion because the Church does not write laws, nor does it enforce them.  Every denomination simply educates people on what is right and wrong.  Yes, some ministers will become vigilantes, and try to take the law into his own hands, but that is the exception and not the norm.  It's our political lawmakers who write laws, and who have a means of enforcing the rights we all have.  Thus, the objective side of me says; So since I am not politically correct, and have a more open mind....  Maybe we should change some of our laws.

Don't like drugs and alcohol...  Why not.  People strung out on drugs and too much alcohol have a change in behavior.  They do stupid stuff, and sometimes it adds great humor to our day.  The good part when they are too strung out they don't remember anything.  Don't like them in your face?  Beat the crap out of them..  (we got rights too).  Sure they get behind the wheel of a car, and bad things happen.  That's why I have insurance.  I am ready for a newer car anyway.

Don't like Sex and Porn...  It's only the churches that say don't do it.  Maybe they grab their reasoning from flim-flam, certainly whatever credible basis they use has no reasoning.  It's kind of weird that most denominations (Christian and non Christian) find this to lead to trouble.  What's funny is society wants to smack the Church for all it does.  But again, the Church only informs what is right and wrong.  It does not set or enforce law.  So what's the harm with it, it hurts no one, correct?  Maybe all the people (married and unmarried) with hurt feelings when their partner interacts with another need to learn to chill out and quit being so closed minded.

Don't like abortions?...  People want to be able to choose for themselves.  Perhaps rights should be extended for parents to have this choice for one additional trimester - the fourth trimester.  Maybe after the blob of tissue has come from the womb that people should be able to choose to keep it.  Perhaps it has Downs Syndrome or some other (birth) defect.  Maybe the fetus was black and both husband and wife were white (daddy just found out that mama likes the mail man too, but that's ok, no one should take that right away from her), and they just don't want to keep the child.  They should be able to perform the procedure on that blob of tissue.  Yea, I know some would see it different, but I see it this way.  You take a woman in labor.  Do a sonogram on her, snap some pictures of the tissue.  Then hours later, take that same tissue, wrap it up in a towel, put in a backpack for a few minutes, take another sonogram of the backpack, shoot the same series of pictures, then compare them.  The only difference will be the umbilical cord will be shorter, the rest of the tissue will look the same.  So if someone wants the choice to terminate a pregnancy so be it, if at a later time the only thing that changed in the delivery is time, then it should be their right to a forth trimester to try it out.  What can it hurt?

Don't like gay marriages?  What a quandary of mixed emotions.  This is a "sexual behavior".  Why in the world do our law makers want to rule on what people do in the bedroom.  You hear the church say "hate the sin, not the sinner".  The issue of same sex attraction is not necessary the sin, but what they do with this behavior that becomes sin.  But, people say we need to separate the church and state.  The same goes with separating sex from state.  Don't discriminate someone because of their orientation.  However, do gays need special rights and their own "hate-crime" laws?  As long as my rights and privileges are not taken away because of someone else's sex behavior.  If I get denied from a job offer because I don't fill their quota of x then my choices are not being met.  If people can tease or educate me because I am a Christian White Heterosexual Male, then I have the right to tease or educate non Christians, non whites, women, or non-Heterosexual people.

The list can go on and on.  Our country is full of people who want to make choices, and when they don't get their way, we claim their rights are taken away.  Teenagers are in a difficult time of their life.  Their minds are becoming brighter every day, and they long to becoming adults so they can make their own choices.  They rebel at the idea of adults, especially parents, making decisions for them.  It's like we shoot them down at every opportunity, yet we correct and guide them because we have learned the hard way, and want them to avoid the same mistakes we made.  But, parents need to rule and guide even if they come across as being not too bright.  I got to agree that some laws are just stupid.  In Kansas, you are obligated to wear a seat belt in a vehicle with 4 steel walls around you, but you are not required to wear a helmet if your riding a motorcycle.  The Church does a good job on getting proper morals out, and many people advocate to our law makers that they write laws to enforce these morals.  I guess we need to step back and be more objective about both sides of an issue.  Ask ourselves, who do people feel it should be right to remove restrictions to drug and alcohol use?  They have a good point of view if we would just consider it.  Then to, why do the law makers take these rights away - maybe their point of view has some merit.  Where do churches get the audacity to preach what they preach?  Could they have any credibility?  Could all their studies and research of the early church fathers mean anything at all? 

The above posting is a good philosophical debate students go round and round with in philosophy classes.  Unfortunately, the ones who get persecuted are the churches.  It's not just atheist against Christian.  It's not just Jew against Catholic, it goes from denomination to denomination, from agnostics to doctors of the faith.  God has given all of us a brilliant mind, and a freedom of will.  We all have good intentions.  Maybe we should just say rather than me being "Roman" Catholic, I should just say that I am "Patrick" Catholic, because my theology is comprised of phrases of "I think we should....", or "In MY opinion they should...", or "It is MY choice that government has to...".  King Henry did not like his bishop telling him he can't have multiple wives so he started his own religion.  Today there are more than 14,000 different protestant religions because all are in disagreement with their choices. In my own denomination, I for one, differentiate between "Roman" Catholic's and "American" Catholics.

For all the law makers and everyone reading this; I will close with an invitation to dig a little deeper on your beliefs.  Your opinion is good, but if it is only based on emotions, then dig a little deeper.  I know I don't have a strong foothold on faith and reason so I have to turn to someone with philosophers who have dedicated their life to study of this.  I know I don't understand the bible as it was written so I turn to a church who have experts in theology, who go back to the original languages of the text, and the tradition of the times.  People who studied all the early writings and traditions of the early church.  I surrender to the believe in the Catholic Church.  I am "Roman" Catholic because I yield and try to follow the teachings of the Holy Father on Faith and Morals, and stand with the authority of the bishops.  I feel they have exhausted studying the same principles I am looking for, so why try to reinvent the wheel?

Father Marc Tilia

This is guest post written by my dad.

It was an overcast, humid Monday afternoon and I was driving south on a major avenue in Overland Park, Kansas.  I noticed an older white haired man dressed in black walking on the sidewalk going in my same direction.  As I was passing him, I noticed that it was Father Marc Tilia, a visiting missionary priest who for 41 years would come to our parish at Holy Cross to spend a week or two sharing his work and asking for our prayers and financial help.  As I passed him, I asked myself, “Why was he still here and why is he walking in this extreme heat 25 blocks from our church where he was staying?”  At the first opportunity, I turned around, pulled up beside him, and asked if he needed a ride.  He enthusiastically replied, “Yes.  I do.”

Father Marc was born in Iowa, was ordained a priest after studying in a seminary in Ava, Missouri, and through a series of unusual events was assigned to the archdiocese of Kansas City in Kansas.  He never served in this area, but instead, gave his life and devotion to the poorest of the poor in a small village in Brazil.  The town was founded in 1730 and never had a priest residing in it.  He said his first mass, in English, to a congregation of six people.  Gradually, he learned the Portuguese language and became loved as a family member.  Today, hundreds of the faithful attend mass regularly and this village now has a church and a school.  This humble, soft spoken man has truly lived the gospel and has introduced Christ to the multitudes.

After getting in my car, I asked Father Marc why he was walking down the busy road in the brutal heat 25 blocks from the Holy Cross rectory.  He said he was dropped off at a rental car establishment and his plan was to rent an automobile for two days so he could buy a couple of small items and drive around one last time in the United States.  Father Marc has decided to spend his last years in Brazil and never return to this country.  One of the actions he took was to cancel his seldom used credit card.  Unbeknownst to him, when he arrived at the rental car building, he was informed that he needed a credit card to rent a vehicle.  Not having one, he walked out, got turned around, and walked several blocks in the wrong direction before he realized he was getting farther away from the rectory.  It is when he turned around and headed back that I discovered him.  I took him to Holy Cross and asked when he would be leaving us.  He said the day after tomorrow, but he would say mass the next day at our church.  I promised him, and myself, that I would attend the Eucharist celebrated by this Godly priest.  

The next morning my mother in law and I attended this mass.  What an honor and a privilege it was to participate in a mass celebrated by this holy man.  In his homily, Father Marc concluded by saying, “Until we meet again.”  I knew what he meant.

After mass, my mother in law alertly asked Father Marc if he still needed a car for a day.  He joyfully said, “Yes. I do.”  So we drove him back to our home and gave him the keys to one of our cars.  I told him I would pick the car up later that evening.  Instead, around 4 in the afternoon, he arrived at our door and said he had finished running his errands.  For one last time, I visited with him as I drove him back to the rectory.  He left a beautiful cardand note to us with a picture of him praying the rosary.  As I was pulling away, he turned back toward me and waved his hands above his head and gave me a final blessing.  That scene will be forever etched in my memory.  I will see you in heaven, Father Marc!

New York and Christians

The legislative battle in New York over gay marriage has dominated the headlines over the past few weeks.  A measure that would make same-sex marriage legal is currently hanging in the balance as I write this post.  Republicans in Albany are delaying the vote while Democrats and gay rights advocates are becoming increasingly frustrated with the GOP’s dilatory tactics.  

As of Friday morning, the number of state senators who had voiced support for the marriage measure- 31 of 62- are just one vote short of a majority.  New York’s Catholic archbishop Timothy Dolan reiterated the Church’s opposition to gay marriage on Sunday, vowing to oppose “any radical bill to redefine the very essence of marriage.”

I’m unsure of how the fight in New York will end up.  However, I am certain that even if gay rights activists lose this battle, they will win the war eventually.  Liberalism is an ongoing force that might experience a few setbacks, but it will win out before long, especially if Christians continue to make themselves a target for marginalization.  Leftist policies are more effective when they have a bulls-eye to prey upon.  Within 20 years, I predict that gay marriage will be legal in 15 or more states.  

The Catholic Church is the most visible opponent of gay marriage, and ultimately, the strongest voice against the relentless tides of liberal social activism.  The Catholic Church has taken a resolute stance against abortion, contraceptives, gay marriage, and stem cell research, but many of these controversial battles are being won by the leftists.  Because the Church has taken such a determined stance against these social questions, the perception young people have of the Church and Christians in general is largely negative and critical.  The Barna Group, an evangelical Christian polling firm, conducted a number of surveys and focus group with adults and young people to determine which terms people tended to apply to Christians.  Among Americans aged 16-29, 91% felt the term “antihomosexual” aptly described Christianity.  “Consistently shows love to other people” polled at 11% among the same demographic.  When you introduce yourself as a Christian to a neighbor, there’s a strong chance you will be labeled as antihomosexual and homophobic rather than accepting of all people.  

If Christians sincerely want to win the battle against same sex marriage, they need to stop conveying rhetoric that paints gays and lesbians as disordered and sinful.  Christians must stop condemning homosexuals and should make an effort to understand the complexity of their lives.  Furthermore, if Christians want the perception of themselves to change, it should be as enthusiastic and determined to reform no-fault divorce laws.  The threat on the essence of marriage comes from the behavior of heterosexuals as well.  Fornication, cohabitation, contraception, and remarriage after divorce are all contrary to Christian sexual ethics yet these actions aren’t as reprehensible as homosexuality in the eyes of many Christian churches.  Christians must ensure that young people know that its teachings are consistent.  While a more consistent implementation of Christian teachings would not win the minds and hearts of many young people, it would at least curb the accusations that Christians are hypocritical and homophobic.  If this is done, young people probably will not adhere to Christian teachings on sexuality, but at least they will respect them.  


Possibly Related Posts


Mother Theresa's Short Story


Remembering Pat Tillman

Mother Teresa's Short Story

When I pick up a person from the street, hungry, I give him
a plate of rice, a piece of bread. But a person who is shut out,
who feels unwanted, unloved, terrified, the person who has been
thrown out of society -- that spiritual poverty is much harder to
overcome. Those who are materially poor can be very wonderful people.
One evening we went out and we picked up four people from the street.
And one of them was in a most terrible condition. I told the Sisters:
“You take care of the other three; I will take care of the one who
looks worse.” So I did for her all that my love can do. I put her in bed,
and there was such a beautiful smile on her face. She took hold of my hand,
as she said one word only: “Thank you” -- and she died. I could not help
but examine my conscience before her. And I asked: "What would I say if I
were in her place?" And my answer was very simple. I would have tried to
draw a little attention to myself. I would have said: “I am hungry,
I am dying, I am cold, I am in pain, or something." But she gave me
much more -- she gave me her grateful love. And she died with a smile
on her face. Then there was the man we picked up from the drain, half-eaten
by worms and, after we had brought him to the home, he only said, “I have
lived like an animal in the street, but I am going to die as an angel,
loved and cared for.” Then, after we had removed all the worms from his body,
all he said, with a big smile, was: “Sister, I am going home to God” -- and
he died. It was so wonderful to see the greatness of that man who could
speak like that without blaming anybody, without comparing anything.
Like an angel -- this is the greatness of people who are spiritually
rich even when they are materially poor....

Life by Mother Teresa

The following is a short poem written by Mother Teresa of Calcutta, the Catholic nun of Albanian ethnicity and Indian citizenship.  For over 45 years, she ministered to the poor, sick, orphaned, and dying as well as founding the Missionaries of Charity in Calcutta.  Following her death, she was beatified by Pope John Paul II and thereafter referred to as "Blessed Teresa of Calcutta".  It is so beautiful I felt the strong urge to post it on Joe's Musings.  Enjoy!

Life

Life is an opportunity, benefit from it.
Life is beauty, admire it.
Life is bliss, taste it.
Life is a dream, realize it.
Life is a challenge, meet it.
Life is a duty, complete it.
Life is a game, play it.
Life is costly, care for it.
Life is wealth, keep it.
Life is love, enjoy it.
Life is mystery, know it.
Life is a promise, fulfill it.
Life is sorrow, overcome it.
Life is a song, sing it.
Life is a struggle, accept it.
Life is tragedy, confront it.
Life is an adventure, dare it.
Life is luck, make it.
Life is too precious, do not destroy it.
Life is life, fight for it.

Roman Catholic Church and Transubstantiation

Last night, I got together with a couple of friends for a movie night.  One friend is very devout and never questions the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church (hereafter referred to as the Church).  The other is a strong Roman Catholic, but is willing to ask questions to gain an understanding of the Church’s doctrine.  

In addition to other things, the topic of transubstantiation came up in conversation between movies.  As you might know, in Roman Catholic theology, transubstantiation means the change of the substance of bread and wine into the Body and Blood (respectively) of Jesus.  The Church teaches the change is not a physical change, but a transformation of the thing in itself.  In other words, the chemistry of the bread and wine does not change, but the substances do.  In appearance, the bread and wine remain the same, but the Church teaches there is a change that is not perceptible to the senses.  The “Real Presence” is the term that refers to Jesus’ actual presence in the elements of the bread and wine.

In metaphysics, philosophers distinguish between the qualities an item has and the thing in itself.  In the case of the bread, it has the qualities of being white, round, and soft.  The whiteness is not the bread, but it is a quality the bread has- the same is true of the roundness and softness.  The senses can perceive these qualities, but they cannot perceive substance (the thing in itself).  Through Jesus’ presence, the Church teaches that during the mass, the substance has been changed to his body and his blood.  This begs the question- how can the Church know there is a change in substance when the senses cannot perceive such things?  The Church responds by quoting scripture, particularly John 6: 53-57.  “Jesus said to them, ‘I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His Blood, you have no life in you.  Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life...For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink.  Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him...so the one who feeds on me will live because of me.’”  The Church interprets this passage literally and applies its message to the Eucharist.  Those who reject the doctrine of transubstantiation interpret Jesus’ words in John 6:53-57 symbolically.  

As a whole, Protestant denominations have not believed in transubstantiation.  Instead, they view the bread and wine as a symbol of Jesus’ body and blood. During the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther turned the doctrine of transubstantiation into a a controversial subject.  He said, “It is not the doctrine of transubstantiation which is to be believed, but simply that Christ is really present at the Eucharist.”  Protestants use John 6:63 as evidence against transubstantiation.  In that passage, Jesus says, “The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing.  The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life.”  Using this passage and others, Protestants argue that the Lord’s Supper is a memorial to his body and blood, not the actual consumption of Jesus.  Because the Church views transubstantiation as a “re-sacrifice” of Jesus, Protestants argue this is a contradiction to what Scripture says, that Jesus died “once for all” and does not need to be sacrificed again. Hebrews 7: 27 declares, “Unlike the other high priests, Jesus does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people.  He sacrificed for their sins ONCE for all when he offered himself.”

Guest Post: An Airport Encounter by Archbishop Dolan

Today's post was written by Archbishop Timothy Dolan.  Timothy Michael Dolan was named Archbishop of New York by Pope Benedict XVI on February 23, 2009.  Previously, he had served as the Archbishop of Milwaukee.  He has been a priest for 35 happy years.


This post is always timely given the ongoing child abuse accusations leveled against Catholic priests.  Sadly, the view of the Catholic Church has become jaded in the eyes of many Americans due to the isolated instances of child abuse and pedophilia.  

An Airport Encounter

It was only the third time it had happened to me in my nearly thirty-five happy years as a priest, all three times over the last nine-and-a-half years.

Other priests tell me it has happened to them a lot more.

Three is enough.  Each time has left me so shaken I was near nausea.

It happened last Friday . . .

I had just arrived at the Denver Airport, there to speak at their popular annual “Living Our Catholic Faith” conference.

As I was waiting with the others for the electronic train to take me to the terminal, a man, maybe in his mid-forties, waiting as well, came closer to me.

“Are you a Catholic priest?” he kindly asked.

“Sure am.  Nice to meet you,” says I, as I offered my hand.

He ignored it.  “I was raised a Catholic,” he replied, almost always a hint of a cut to come, but I was not prepared for the razor sharpness of the stiletto, as he went on, “and now, as a father of two boys, I can’t look at you or any other priest without thinking of a sexual abuser.”

What to respond?  Yell at him?  Cuss him out?  Apologize?  Deck him?  Express understanding?  I must admit all such reactions came to mind as I staggered with shame and anger from the damage of the wound he had inflicted with those stinging words.

“Well,” I recovered enough to remark, “I’m sure sorry you feel that way.  But, let me ask you, do you automatically presume a sexual abuser when you see a Rabbi or Protestant minister?”

“Not at all,” he came back through gritted teeth as we both boarded the train.

“How about when you see a coach, or a boy scout leader, or a foster parent, or a counsellor, or physician?”  I continued.

“Of course not!” he came back.  “What’s all that got to do with it?”

“A lot,” I stayed with him, “because each of those professions have as high a percentage of sexual abuse, if not even higher, than that of priests.”

“Well, that may be,” he retorted.  “But the Church is the only group that knew it was going on, did nothing about it, and kept transferring the perverts around.”

“You obviously never heard the stats on public school teachers,” I observed.  “In my home town of New York City alone, experts say the rate of sexual abuse among public school teachers is ten times higher than that of priests, and these abusers just get transferred around.”  (Had I known at that time the news in in last Sunday’s New York Times about the high rate of abuse of the most helpless in state supervised homes, with reported abusers simply transferred to another home, I would have mentioned that, too.)

To that he said nothing, so I went in for a further charge.

“Pardon me for being so blunt, but you sure were with me, so, let me ask:  when you look at yourself in a mirror, do you see a sex abuser?”

Now he was as taken aback as I had been two-minutes before.  “What the hell are you talking about?”

“Sadly,” I answered, “studies tell us that most children sexually abused are victims of their own fathers or other family members.”

Enough of the debate, I concluded, as I saw him dazed.  So I tried to calm it down.

“So, I tell you what:  when I look at you, I won’t see a sex abuser, and I would appreciate the same consideration from you.”

The train had arrived at baggage claim, and we both exited together.

“Well then, why do we only hear this garbage about you priests,” he inquired, as he got a bit more pensive.

“We priests wonder the same thing.  I’ve got a few reasons if you’re interested.”

He nodded his head as we slowly walked to the carousel.

“For one,” I continued, “we priests deserve the more intense scrutiny, because people trust us more as we dare claim to represent God, so, when on of us do it – even if only a tiny minority of us ever have — it is more disgusting.”

“Two, I’m afraid there are many out there who have no love for the Church, and are itching to ruin us.  This is the issue they love to endlessly scourge us with.”

“And, three, I hate to say it,” as I wrapped it up, “there’s a lot of money to be made in suing the Catholic Church, while it’s hardly worth suing any of the other groups I mentioned before.”

We both by then had our luggage, and headed for the door.  He then put his hand out, the hand he had not extended five minutes earlier when I had put mine out to him.  We shook.

“Thanks.  Glad I met you.”

He halted a minute.  “You know, I think of the great priests I knew when I was a kid.  And now, because I work in IT at Regis University, I know some devoted Jesuits.  Shouldn’t judge all you guys because of the horrible sins of a few.”

“Thanks!,” I smiled.

I guess things were patched-up, because, as he walked away, he added, “At least I owe you a joke:  What happens when you can’t pay your exorcist?”

“Got me,” I answered.

“You get ‘re-possessed’!”

We both laughed and separated.

Notwithstanding the happy ending, I was still trembling . . . and almost felt like I needed an exorcism to expel my shattered soul, as I had to confront again the horror this whole mess has been to victims and their families, our Catholic people like the man I had just met . . . and to us priests.

Movie Review: Blood Money

Recently, the pro-life club at KU screened a film called Blood Money, a documentary that aims to expose the reality of the abortion industry.  Blood Money tries to accomplish quite a bit, but I thought it succeeded in laying out facts about the abortion industry and the emotional impact that abortion has on both women and men.  

The film squeezes Roe v. Wade, Planned Parenthood, the debate over when life begins,  how abortion affects women who have had one, and the sociocultural effects of abortion into an hour and 15 minutes.  As the title implies, the main focus was how abortion has become a business, primarily through the vehicle of Planned Parenthood.  

I took a look at Planned Parenthood’s most recent annual report out of curiosity, and what I found was disturbing.  Blood Money interviewed Carol Everette who is an former employee of Planned Parenthood.  She shared a couple horror stories, one in which a woman bled to death after aborting her baby.  In another instance, an abortion procedure went awry.  Instead of pulling out the dead baby from the mother’s womb, the “doctor” accidentally grabbed the woman’s large intestine and yanked it out of her.  She said, “We [Planned Parenthood] would give them [young girls] a low-dose birth control pill they would get pregnant on or a defective condom.  Our goal was 3-5 abortions for every girl between the ages of thirteen and eighteen.  These are the kind of stories that make you realize how horrific, disturbing, and shocking abortion actually is.  So when I carefully read Planned Parenthood’s most recent annual report, it was as if I was hearing two completely different stories.  The letter from the Chair and President was peppered with phrases such as “pro-choice”, “the nation’s largest sex educator”, and “powerful advocate for sexual health and rights.”  Planned Parenthood claims that only three percent of their clients received abortion services in 2008.  Then, it cleverly covered up where their revenue streams were coming from on their income statement.  $1.1 billion in revenue came from the following sources- health center income, government grants and contracts, private contributions and bequests, support from affiliates, and other operating revenue.  You know what “health center income” means?  It means about $350-$950 for an abortion in the first trimester and usually more for a second or third trimester abortion.  The cost to have an abortion increases depending on how long a woman has been pregnant, but as Planned Parenthood points out, “Hospitals generally cost more.”

While the business aspect of abortion is directly related to my major and interests, another deeply disconcerting part of abortion is the long-term health effects on the woman.  Abortion is sold as a quick fix to an unplanned pregnancy.  Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics market their service as one that will make your problem go away.  The movie interviewed several women who testified that the problem does not go away after you have an abortion.  In fact, after an abortion, the mental and psychological torment of the woman are just beginning.  Blood Money interviewed women who attempted suicide after aborting their babies.  One woman said she has spent the better part of 20 years trying to forget about her abortion, but she is stilled haunted by it.